1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

While We Wait: Writer's Block & Other Lame Excuses

Discussion in 'Never Ending Stories' started by Nylan, Dec 24, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Symphony D.

    Symphony D. Deity

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2003
    Messages:
    8,991
    Location:
    ALNITAHIA FOREVER
    Look pal,

    Israel never blackmailed Australia with nuclear weapons use in order to get immediate aid. You ain't got crap.
     
  2. ChiefDesigner

    ChiefDesigner Sunset Emperor

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2007
    Messages:
    761
    Juifs, la France n'est pas à toi.
    --French protest slogan, July 23rd, 2014


    Honestly? I'm parochial. I'm partial to the argument that the history of the Jewish nation has been two thousand years of persecution topped off with a fireworks display from the Dachau incinerators because I have friends who have actually faced pervasive discrimination due to their Judaism.

    Europeans chanting anti-Semitic slogans and burning synagogues in Germany doesn't help, either. Isolated incidents and the far right, fortunately, but really, it's 2014, can we get over the blood libel already?
     
  3. Symphony D.

    Symphony D. Deity

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2003
    Messages:
    8,991
    Location:
    ALNITAHIA FOREVER
    So where's the Romani state? I mean I get you, anti-Semitism is a legitimate problem and one that's on the upswing again in Europe. But Israel doesn't represent all Jews. Israel is not the exclusive source and terminus of all policy and interests surrounding Jews. In fact, treating it as such is actively dangerous and harmful.

    If Robert Mugabe up and declared Zimbabwe a Black State that represented and embodied the interests of all blacks everywhere and anyone who dared criticize him was just a bloody racist, would you take it seriously? Blacks have suffered organized oppression for at least 500 years.

    If Sri Lanka up and declared themselves a Buddhist State that represented and embodied the interests of all Buddhists everywhere, and anyone who dared criticize them was just religiously intolerant, would you take it seriously? Buddhists have gotten slammed quite a bit over the last 2,500 years.

    If Russia up and declared themselves a Slavic State that represented and embodied the interests of all Slavs everywhere, and anyone who dared criticize them was a nationalist bigoted pig dog, would you take it seriously? (Also, wait...) They've been invaded from every which way for 1,000 years.

    If the Lakota up and declared themselves an Indigenous American State that represented and embodied the interests of all native Americans everywhere, and anyone who dared criticize them was an illegal immigrant squatting on their land to be forcefully evicted, would you take it seriously? 500 years of systematic extermination and cultural extinction to call a casus belli.

    Would you be in favor of these projects? Would you argue they have less merit than the Zionist one? Because to me, they all sound ridiculous and extremely problematic even if the grievances and the tragedies are very real. Israel, unlike these examples, already exists, which puts it in a unique category. But it doesn't get to hide behind the Jewish people just because it claims to represent them when quite a number of them have nothing to do with it, which is precisely why this virulent anti-Semite name-calling is so damn stupid. Israeli foreign policy does not get a special exemption just because they claim to be a Jewish state, because of the Holocaust, or because of a long history of oppression. If those are the only requirements, an awful lot of people can claim an awful lot of grievances as excuses to do whatever they want. When that happens, we all lose.
     
  4. Grandkhan

    Grandkhan Telvanni Master Wizard

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,677
    Location:
    Inside a mushroom
    Its almost like the difference is that the intent is self defence rather than to cause terror or something.

    Wow.

    You are unironically aok with [AMERICAN FASCIST IMPERIALISM]. Please explain the difference between Israeli actions in Gaza and US actions in Afghanistan.

    Its almost like the US's world system is contingent on foreign aid to other countries in exchange for things. You seem to think that the US-Israel relationship is somehow exclusively one way (especially in terms of R&D, despite the fact that Israel has a massive military and civilian R&D base and all the American companies you vaunt as throwing equipment for greedy Jews Israelis to sell to the cunning wicked Chinaman PRC have R&D centers in Israel). Especially given that pretty much all US intelligence in the middle east comes from Israel or something.

    If thats your logic, please explain why any other country worldwide should be giving the US any preferential trade agreements, bases, or intelligence at all? I paid for Australian boots on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan, what have I gotten out of this? Australia hasn't benefited from boots on the ground in the middle east. Tell you what, the US can kill as many Iraqi and Afghan civilian as it likes as long as my money stops paying for it, and so the US world order collapses.

    Also you are like a libertarian but for countries.

    I wasn't saying that criticism of Israel is antisemitism. I was saying that claiming that there is no such thing as genuine support of Israel and that any apparent support of Israel has been paid off by those greedy kikes is.

    Remember kids, jews Israel runs the banks.

    Also symph unironically buys into nazi theories about jews selling out germany except you replace germany with the US world order, the enemy with the PRC, and the jews with israel so

    remember kids, you're not a racist if you say "urban youth" instead of "black people."

    You missed the bit where Israel was losing the Arab-Israeli war to a nation who's stated aim was its destruction. Remember kids, a state has no right to prevent its own destruction (especially when its those greedy jews, lol, wanting to be free from a systemic instutionalised persecution? don't get greedy jewey, we said we were sorry for the holocaust what more do you want you greedy yid?) so when a state says "we will take steps to prevent our destruction, either you help us take the step you want or we will take the step you don't want us to take, that's blackmail.

    I can't think of a single case where the US threatened to use nuclear weapons to get what it wanted ten years prior.

    Do you reject the notion that a state has the right to make it clear what the options are on the table and to request aid to prevent use of those options in a case of clear national survival? Because if you do, the US has been doing that since the 50s.
     
  5. Symphony D.

    Symphony D. Deity

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2003
    Messages:
    8,991
    Location:
    ALNITAHIA FOREVER
    How is murdering 1,800 people in places where there are no militants with rockets and bombs "self-defense?" Drug cartels routinely cross the US-Mexico border, better mine it and fire artillery across to defend ourselves! No, that's not reasonable. Yes, this does mean the US routinely engages in terrorism.

    If you really want to criticize America you should be picking Iraq, wherein we killed, by most estimates, 100,000 to 120,000 Iraqis (with some estimates putting it as high as 1,000,000) over precisely 0 American casualties, for the sake of essentially reducing the global price of oil by freeing up supplies kept in place by the embargos on Saddam.

    Yes, I am aware of that. I have already repudiated it. I will repudiate it again for your sake of mind. I repudiate many US actions in many conflicts. We have a proclivity toward overreaction, unnecessary application of force, and unnecessarily unilateral action. I am fully aware that in condemning Israeli actions I must also condemn American actions. If you think you've caught me in a trap, you are very sadly mistaken.

    1. Israel receives vastly more foreign aid than any other country except Afghanistan, where a war is going on, and it is not by any stretch of the imagination either the most important or most powerful US ally, so no, the world does not work in the fashion you describe.
    2. US foreign aid totals around 1% of the entire federal budget. It is insignificant in comparison to the total budget both in relative and absolute terms.
    3. The US has far greater partnerships with other nations, particularly in defense R&D, both in quantity and in terms of total value, than it does with Israel.
    4. The US conducts most of its partnerships through means other than foreign aid. This is a thing called "soft power."
    5. Israel does not contribute troops to US missions because they would be too politically damaging.
    6. Israel does not host US forces.
    7. Israel is not a major factor in the main intelligence gathering apparatuses of the United States and its allies.
    Your understanding of the world is wrong. Sorry.

    I don't know, why do you? If you're dissatisfied with our global leadership, and I can see many reasons why you would be, by all means protest it domestically and internationally. I'm afraid you don't have many alternatives, and even fewer palatable ones but perhaps a new political paradigm is around the corner after all.

    Libertarians are social isolationists and sovereignists. I hate isolationism. I am not a strong proponent of immutable national sovereignty. I find it outmoded. Once again, you are wrong.

    Build me a few more strawmen.

    There we go.

    You're really awful at reading trolling. How long have you been using these internets?

    So Grandkhan what do you really think of Aborigines?

    You nailed it bro, saying "Give us things or we will nuke ourselves and everyone around us and possibly precipitate a wider thermonuclear war between you and the USSR" is not blackmail.

    The US did not threaten to use nuclear weapons to compel a previously uninvolved third party to do something for it for free. Maybe you don't see a distinction, but that doesn't mean one doesn't exist.

    Do you reject the right of civilians who go about their daily lives with no political motives to be free from death falling out of the sky?
     
  6. Azale

    Azale Deity

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Messages:
    18,723
    Location:
    Texas
    I wasn't going to get involved in this fracas cause Symph can handle himself (masterfully in this case), but I had to say something here so he knows it hasnt gone unnoticed.

    This is a ridiculous caricature of Symph's posts. He mentioned that Israel acts like a mercenary state and does not act with the same single-minded loyalty to the US that the US does to it, so it is ridiculous to tie so much of our foreign policy to it (and the intellectual imaginations of so many of our establishment "grand strategy intellectuals", just go have a gander at their writings if you doubt the ****old Israel has over the whole edifice of American foreign policy).

    You are acting like the perfect stereotype of an antisemite-baiter. You stormed into the thread all angry and raring to go, ready to all but accuse Symph of having protocols of the elders of zion on his bedside table. Think for a sec.
     
  7. Symphony D.

    Symphony D. Deity

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2003
    Messages:
    8,991
    Location:
    ALNITAHIA FOREVER
    Symphony D.: Sir! I have a plan!
    [standing up from his wheelchair]
    Symphony D.: Mein Führer! I can post!
     
  8. Perfectionist

    Perfectionist Angel of Verdun

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2006
    Messages:
    1,023
    Location:
    FOB Heathrow
    Aha, no. Israeli intelligence is actively hostile half the time (and not in the NSA "we're listening to Merkel's calls" way either, but in the "we'll break into your home and rearrange your furniture," or "we'll sell out your precious assets to Syria to make a point" way), and as for the rest of the time...you know what US intelligence's position on Israeli-provided intel is? It's essentially don't believe a damn thing without independent verification because they will lie to us and smile doing it. That's why, for instance, the intelligence agencies wouldn't back the Israeli-provided narrative in Ghouta last year. These people bought what Curveball was selling, but they don't trust Mossad.
     
  9. Symphony D.

    Symphony D. Deity

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2003
    Messages:
    8,991
    Location:
    ALNITAHIA FOREVER
  10. erez87

    erez87 Lord of Random

    Joined:
    May 16, 2002
    Messages:
    13,450
    Location:
    Lod, Israel
    So I'm interested Sym, what you think the world should do about the Israeli-Palestinian situation as it stands right now? Obviously both sides are becoming more and more extreme each passing year so it's probably not going to come from them. Israel and Palestinians will seemingly fight forever, and since Israel is stronger, more Palestinians will die than Israelis.

    So what do you think should be done to stop it? I'm doing what I can, I vote for parties in Israel that say they will sign peace. What do you think the world should do?
     
  11. Grandkhan

    Grandkhan Telvanni Master Wizard

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,677
    Location:
    Inside a mushroom
    I think you all missed the bit where Symph said this.

    Honestly every time somebody claims that symph doesn't unironically buy into the protocols of the elders of zion with jews swapped out with Israel i will just repost this.

    Will respond to the rest when im not on a bus, but symph i know you oppose the iraq war, i said afghanistan for a reason, given that from memory you continue to support the us actions in afghanistan.
     
  12. Symphony D.

    Symphony D. Deity

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2003
    Messages:
    8,991
    Location:
    ALNITAHIA FOREVER
    I'm neither a policy expert nor a trained diplomat and I don't claim to hold all the answers.

    On the one hand, Hamas must in fact be forced to stand down. Their rocket attacks and other forms of aggression against Israel are both woefully ineffective in a military sense and massively counterproductive in a local political sense. This will be difficult as Hamas has demonstrated it's politically fractured and contains what are essentially rogue elements. Even if the main body of Hamas comes to the table, the entirety of it might not. For that reason, Israel must allow for some flexibility in any ceasefire rather than immediately declaring them void at any provocation, as it has been doing.

    The current tactic of Israel forcibly disarming Hamas is enormously counterproductive for Israeli PR and for international relations. The best way of disarming Hamas is likely to be certain forms of security assurances by the international community and the deployment of international forces of a varied background (i.e., preferably including other Arab or Muslim nations, akin to the 1991 Gulf War Coalition) into Gaza to effect a disarmament. The siege of Gaza must be lifted, in a controlled fashion, and Gaza returned to some state of political normalcy, in so far as such a thing exists at all in the Palestinian territories. Elections in Gaza could likely be extracted as a concession. Hamas must at any rate recognize Israel's right to exist as a gesture of good faith in negotiations.

    Both sides must be forced back to the negotiation table on the two-state solution to which they have repeatedly nominally asserted their intent of pursuit. Other than permitting international forces to handle a security concern clearly beyond its capabilities to reasonably control and to provide humanitarian aid, and having a less itchy trigger finger, nothing of note has been demanded of Israel so far in these suggestions.

    It is clear that Israeli ambitions on Gaza and the West Bank must be repudiated. Likewise, continued Israeli colonization through settlements must end. These must be non-negotiable. These are both ultranationalist objectives and have no place in a process whose objective is a lasting peaceful solution. If Israel refuses to comply, economic and political pressure should be applied to them in the form of sanctions and the withdrawal of aid and assistance for as long as is required to achieve this effect.

    Once both sides are at the table, a concrete roadmap to the two-state solution must be established. If possible, exclaves should be minimized through the destruction of settlements and relocation of settlers; if not, territory swaps should be made. Israel cannot reasonably insist on a Palestinian state that has no self-defense capability and the bulk of whose territory is controlled by Israeli forces. That is not acceptable, as it is the status quo. The long-term involvement of international forces in Palestinian territory will likely be a requirement to assuage the security concerns of both parties.

    The United States and its European partners must be ready to apply considerable pressure to both sides to reach this outcome. The biggest stumbling block to this is likely to be the recalcitrance of the United States. Unconditional US support for Israel is counterproductive an active impediment to the process. The US has to be a more impartial actor to achieve the result it wants.

    They didn't miss it, hoss, you're just literally incapable of detecting sarcasm in text format, which you probably should have discerned from "Patron Saint George" and "Comrade Lenin" in the next line (which you ever so curiously omitted), something which literally every other poster in this thread picked up on except you because nobody took it seriously. You have awful reading comprehension skills and are apparently seemingly totally unable to place remarks in context to other nearby remarks. Please, do reply to this stating you know better than me what my intent was, how absolutely sure you are that everything I have posted in this discussion was stated in the latest and greatest traditions of the New Sincerity, and how I secretly have a Waffen SS uniform in my closet. (And a picture of stalin006 on my dresser.)

    e: No, really, let me point out how bad you are at reading: I literally told Thlayli I hated him and even he did not take that remark as sincerely as you have been because it was that obviously hyperbole. You are fundamentally bad at reading and apparently completely incapable of reprocessing information in a new light, i.e., everything I have said since the end of my "dialogue" with him. You are broken. Feel bad.

    I've opposed the deployment of massed forces and a permanent conventional presence, i.e., the surge into Tora Bora, for about a decade now. It should have remained a special forces operation dedicated to eliminating Al Qaeda personnel with, at most, assistance to the Northern Coalition. Nation-building doesn't work. Try again.
     
  13. Grandkhan

    Grandkhan Telvanni Master Wizard

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,677
    Location:
    Inside a mushroom
    u weren't trolling bout this bit though. greedy jews trying to get us inot wars to sap our strength n getting romney elected.

    pls explain how bibi saying "it would probs be better for israel if romney wins." is meddling in us elections without being an antisemite. if you can i will stop calling u an antisemite.
     
  14. Symphony D.

    Symphony D. Deity

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2003
    Messages:
    8,991
    Location:
    ALNITAHIA FOREVER
    1. You're not American, so maybe you don't follow these things, but I am in fact completely unaware of another circumstance where a foreign leader has openly advocated for one Presidential candidate over another during the election season. So first, it was more or less unprecedented in modern history. Even Ehud Olmert, former Prime Minister of Israel, thought it was entirely inappropriate. Is Ehud Olmert an anti-Semite too, Grandkhan? Have you found his todtenkopf hat too? News article after news article calls it unprecedented, not just by an Israeli, but by anyone. I guess our entire media is anti-Semitic!
    2. I guess the Jewish media is anti-Semitic too, check this out: "He inserted himself into the election by presenting himself essentially as a GOP politician,” says Gershom Gorenberg, an Israeli journalist and the author of The Unmaking of Israel." What a Nazi!
    3. Check out President Bill Clinton's incredulity at Bibi's actions, which Perfectionist already quoted in this thread. I guess he's Hitler!
    4. You grossly misrepresent what he said. His words were "The world needs American strength, not apologies;" i.e., "Obama is weak," "Obama is an appeaser," "Obama will let 'the world' [Israel] down." Now again, you're not an American, so you haven't had to deal with Dick Cheney coming on TV every six weeks to proclaim America is in danger and terrorists will attack again because Obama is incompetent/weak/etc., but I have. I have sat through two election seasons of it. I don't appreciate it from Americans. I definitely don't appreciate it from a foreign leader. I really definitely don't appreciate it from a foreign leader when it's the first time in living memory a foreign leader has done such a thing. And it doesn't matter who that leader is or where they're from. It was beyond the pale. Literally everyone agrees. I guess the Nazis won WWII after all, huh?
    So yes, please, continue to call my reasons anti-Semitic when both the entire press of the Free World, a former US President, and a former Israeli PM all called it ridiculous. But hurry up, I just can't wait to get started on the Fourth Reich.
     
  15. erez87

    erez87 Lord of Random

    Joined:
    May 16, 2002
    Messages:
    13,450
    Location:
    Lod, Israel
    How can Hamas be forced to stand down? Israel have allowed flexibility, until the point where it isn't a single rocket every few days but dozens a day, then usually Israel attacks back on normal times. But leaving that - how can Hamas be forced to stand down? They have said many times they will not, in fact every single cease fire in the past month they asked for they also broke within a few minutes and up to an hour. So how do you offer we stop Hamas from wielding military actions?

    Sure, agreed. So what countries are going to send forces to Gaza to disarm the Palestinians? And which Arab country would agree to help disarm the people they wish to see as the sole controllers of the area? So, what countries will ever send their men to Gaza to die for Israel? I'm all for Israel agreeing to that, why do you think the world have not even hinted at this idea?

    Also - a harder question, why would Israel trust you? The world have shown many times through history that if the Jews depend on someone else for protection, they get genocided. Why would Israel ever trust the world again considering its awful track record with Jews, and its even worse track record with all genocides happening around the world. Have they killed them all in Sudan and Syria yet?

    How do you force a group that uses the people it supposedly protects as shields and PR? I agree Israel should be put under a tighter leash, but how do you intend to put Hamas under one?

    Fully agreed. The settlements are a huge black mark on Israel and should only be allowed to exist if the Palestinians prefer a land switch that allows those to exist, otherwise, remove them.

    Agreed. Problem here is that the last time the Israeli army wasn't all over the west bank, people were blowing up in buses on nearly a weekly basis. How can that be solved? I'm all for Israel leaving the west bank like it did in Gaza - how can Israel be assured Hamas won't just take over there too?

    All agreed. But again, the question remains, how do you pressure Hamas into anything? They don't mind dying for their cause, by blowing up in buses, how can you convince such people to come to the table? Or in your idea, force them to come to the table. How? How can anyone deal with Hamas?


    If you respond in the nice edition of WWW in the most cynical mean way possible you will make my day.
     
  16. Symphony D.

    Symphony D. Deity

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2003
    Messages:
    8,991
    Location:
    ALNITAHIA FOREVER
    By force, if necessary. Attacking an international coalition would be a very different prospect from attacking Israeli forces in terms of repercussions. Hamas has basically no cards but the sympathy it has garnered as a direct result of the current conflict in America, and whatever else it has from past ones in Europe. Their hand is weak.

    Jordan and Egypt, at least, should both have an active stake in seeing this issue resolved, given they border Palestinian territory and house Palestinian refugees. Both of these nations have strong relations with the United States. As to why this hasn't been done, I would pin the blame squarely on the lack of US leadership, or more acutely, the US refusal to internationalize the issue. The US has consistently tried to act as the sole intermediary, and it has consistently failed. The time has come for a new approach, although it would likely need to continue to be US led.

    Frankly speaking if Israel cannot trust a coalition effort likely at least nominally led by the US, after all the time the US has stood by it, then it can't trust anyone and the whole endeavor is a lost cause anyway. Israel would still retain its defensive capabilities, they would simply not be permitted sole (and eventually, any) jurisdiction over Palestinian areas.

    Boots on the ground. For as much crap as people give the UN it did have a long-standing peacekeeping presence in Lebanon and on the Suez Canal. Independent coalition forces have a fairly established history of working as well. Hamas cannot easily retaliate against the nations sending these forces directly, and to do so or to attack the forces would signal its lack of negotiation in good faith, prompting either a peacekeeper/coalition response, or potentially a return to the status quo. Neither of these would benefit Hamas, which is essentially crippled as a result of the blockade, and whom would be a direct beneficiary of this international presence. It is, as Don Corleone once said "An offer they can't refuse."

    The nature of democracy is that sometimes the people of somewhere will elect someone you don't like. That said, in being forced to negotiate and concede so much, there is a fair chance that Hamas's more extremist methods will be delegitimized in the process. Hamas already hasn't taken over the West Bank and given its performance in Gaza would be unlikely to do so.

    In terms of physical security, there would ideally be a transition from IDF to international forces, probably in phases and over some extended period. If I had to guess it would take 12 to 18 months.

    Hamas has very little. Part of the reason they're so dangerous is they have essentially nothing to lose but their lives. They're a rogue actor. You have to give to get, and so Hamas has to be "brought in from the cold" and given incentives not to defect and revert to its present behavior, ideally mostly in the form of humanitarian aid for the people of Gaza—without whom Hamas cannot rule. As it is, they have no incentives not to continue on with their behavior. The current solution is all sticks and no carrots. A different set of sticks and a few carrots to begin with should be tried. Their willingness to call for truces indicates they understand the desperation of their position.
     
  17. Perfectionist

    Perfectionist Angel of Verdun

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2006
    Messages:
    1,023
    Location:
    FOB Heathrow
    You could try TALKING TO THEM. Hamas DID stand down. After the Pillar of Cloud ceasefire they stopped firing rockets, stopped trying to kill soldiers, and did everything they could to keep Islamic Jihad and the rest of the smaller groups in line, even as Israeli provocations mounted and Israel conspicuously ignored its commitments to ease restrictions on the Strip; even Shin Bet said that Hamas were mostly keeping up their end. They made nice with Abu Mazen, made the right noises about two-state solution, reconciled with the people who'd tried to kill them in 2007. They played ball. What they got for it was Israeli deceit and treachery aimed at destroying that progress towards peace. Hamas' intransigence isn't the problem here; the problem is how do we stop Israel from again violating whatever agreement is reached at the first excuse in order to disrupt any progress towards Palestinian statehood. The only way we can do that is if the sole superpower grows a pair and lays down the law, instead of covering for Israel and trying to weasel out of it.
     
  18. erez87

    erez87 Lord of Random

    Joined:
    May 16, 2002
    Messages:
    13,450
    Location:
    Lod, Israel
    Sym - so how do we go on to the process of other nations fighting Israel's war in Gaza? Sounds like a great idea to me.

    Perf - should Israel deal with the elected ruler, rather than some ragtags who want to take over? In any case, I agree our governments in the last decade or saw have been awful on this subject (and others) and explained why I think so - Bibi lives on the status quo, as long as there is "war" only then our right wing survives...
     
  19. Daftpanzer

    Daftpanzer There may be more posts after this.

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2002
    Messages:
    6,581
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Portsmouth, England, UK
    " the internet has caused more war than peace so far. It's played a key role in the recent middle east rebelions. The internet is generally a good place to share ideas, but it can't make people agree on anything. "
     
  20. Symphony D.

    Symphony D. Deity

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2003
    Messages:
    8,991
    Location:
    ALNITAHIA FOREVER
    Realistically, Bibi would have to call for the presence of international forces, either out of some newfound spirit of peacemaking, or because the rest of the world had already twisted his arms enough behind the scene to force him to.

    Given that until very recently the actions in Gaza were characterized as something that would go on indefinitely, I almost have to believe that the fact Israel chose to withdraw its forces was itself the product of some relatively heavy arm-twisting. I don't imagine relations with Obama are very good right now given how Kerry's been treated.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page